ARMY NETWORKS

Select Programs Are 

Utilizing Competition 

to Varying Degrees

Report to the Subcommittee on 

Tactical Air and Land Forces, 

Committee on Armed Services, House 

of Representatives

May 2014

GAO-14-460

United States Government Accountability Office
United States Government Accountability Office

Highlights of GAO-14-460, a report to the 

Subcommittee on Tactical Air and Land 

Forces, Committee on Armed Services, House 

of Representatives

May 2014

ARMY NETWORKS

Select Programs Are Utilizing Competition to Varying 

Degrees 

Why GAO Did This Study

For nearly 20 years, the Army has had 

limited success in developing an 

information network—sensors, 

software, and radios—to give soldiers 

the exact information they need, when 

they need it, in any environment. The 

Army has declared its tactical network 

as its top modernization priority and 

estimated the modernization may cost 

up to $3 billion per year into the 

foreseeable future. The Army’s current 

modernization approach is intended to 

leverage solutions developed by 

private industry. 

Given the costs and importance of the 

network, GAO was asked to examine 

aspects of the Army’s effort to acquire 

network capabilities. This is the third 

report in response to the 

Subcommittee’s requests. 

In this report, GAO examines the

Army’s progress in implementing 

competitive strategies for tactical 

networking systems. GAO selected a 

non-generalizable sample of 9 of these

25 systems that the Army indicated are 

critical for ensuring soldiers are able to 

send and receive mission-critical 

information between units, and that 

cover the breadth of warfighter 

operations. GAO reviewed acquisition 

strategies for evidence that the Army 

was seeking competition. 

What GAO Recommends

GAO is not making recommendations

in this report. DOD provided technical 

comments on a draft of this report, 

which were incorporated, as 

appropriate.

What GAO Found

The Army is incorporating competition in various ways for most of the nine 

tactical networking acquisition programs GAO examined. To achieve the best 

return on the government’s investment, federal agencies are generally required 

to award contracts competitively. As the Army has decreased the amount of inhouse system development it is doing for tactical networking equipment, it is 

using various tools to involve private industry to meet its needs. One such tool is 

the agile capabilities life cycle process whereby the Army determines the 

capabilities it needs and gaps in those capabilities, and uses market research 

and semi-annual evaluations, among other means, to involve industry. According 

to the Army, this agile process provides opportunities for enhancing competition. 

The Army acquisition strategy for eight of the nine systems discusses plans for 

competition and market research. An acquisition strategy is not required for the 

Soldier Radio Waveform Appliqué system because it is not a formal acquisition 

program; however, the Army conducted market research and is seeking 

competition. GAO grouped the nine systems into three categories based on 

similarities in the competition strategy. Specifically,

• In two of the nine systems GAO examined—Mid-tier Networking Vehicular 

Radio and Soldier Radio Waveform Appliqué—the Army is beginning new 

programs and structuring the acquisition approaches to competitively procure 

non-developmental capabilities directly from industry. The Army competitively 

awarded a procurement contract for its Mid-Tier Networking Vehicular Radio, 

providing units for risk reduction and requirements verification. In April 2014 

the Army competitively awarded contracts to four vendors to buy the Soldier 

Radio Waveform Appliqué. 

• Five of the nine systems GAO studied have been under development for 

many years. Three of those—the Airborne, Maritime, and Fixed Station radio; 

the Rifleman Radio; and the Manpack Radio—were part of the Joint Tactical 

Radio System, which was previously competed and which the Army has 

restructured. The Army had been developing software-defined radios to 

interoperate with existing radios. The Army is now seeking nondevelopmental solutions through competition to provide the needed 

capability. For the other two systems, the Joint Battle Command–Platform 

and Nett Warrior, the Army reports that it plans to use full and open 

competition for individual subcomponents. In both cases, the Army 

conducted market research to identify vendors or seek feedback on 

requirements. 

• The Army deemed competition impractical for the two remaining systems in 

GAO’s review, the Warfighter Information Network-Tactical Increment 2 and 

Warfighter Information Network-Tactical Increment 3. The Army considered 

acquisition strategies for more competition in the development and 

procurement of these systems but determined that only the incumbent 

contractor could satisfy the requirements without unacceptable delays. 

Nevertheless, the Army continues using market research to identify 

interested contractors and has awarded several competitive contracts for 

subcomponents under these two systems. View GAO-14-460. For more information, 

contact Belva M. Martin at (202) 512-4841 or 

martinb@gao.gov.
Page i GAO-14-460 Army Networks

Letter 1

Background 3

Army Utilizing Competition in Various Ways Across Nine Tactical 

Networking Systems 6

Agency Comments 13

Appendix I Objectives, Scope, and Methodology 14

Appendix II Supplemental Information for Nine Army Networking Systems 16

Appendix III Comments from the Department of Defense 35

Appendix IV GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments 36

Tables

Table 1: Description of Selected Army Tactical Networking 

Systems 6

Table 2: Status of Army Systems’ Acquisition Strategies 8

Contents
Page ii GAO-14-460 Army Networks

Abbreviations

ACAT Acquisition Category

AMF Airborne and Maritime/Fixed Station

BFT Blue Force Tracking

DOD Department of Defense

FAR Federal Acquisition Regulation

FCBC2 Force XXI, Battle Command, Brigade and Below

FFP Firm Fixed Price

GMR Ground Mobile Radio

HMS Handheld, Manpack, and Small Form Fit 

IDIQ Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity

JBC-P Joint Battle Command-Platform

JCR Joint Capabilities Release

JTRS Joint Tactical Radio System

MDA Milestone Decision Authority

MNVR Mid-Tier Networking Vehicular Radio

NIE Network Integration Evaluation

RFP Request for Proposal

SALT Small Airborne Link 16 Terminal

SANR Small Airborne Networking Radio

SRW Soldier Radio Waveform

WIN-T Warfighter Information Network-Tactical

This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright protection in the 

United States. The published product may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety 

without further permission from GAO. However, because this work may contain 

copyrighted images or other material, permission from the copyright holder may be 

necessary if you wish to reproduce this material separately.
Page 1 GAO-14-460 Army Networks

441 G St. N.W.

Washington, DC 20548

May 29, 2014

The Honorable Michael R. Turner

Chairman

The Honorable Loretta Sanchez

Ranking Member

Subcommittee on Tactical Air and Land Forces

Committee on Armed Services

House of Representatives

In 2011, the Army began a major undertaking to modernize its tactical 

network—an effort that may cost about $3 billion per year into the 

foreseeable future—to improve communication and other capabilities and 

to provide needed information to soldiers and commanders on the 

battlefield. The Army has declared the network its number one 

modernization priority. For nearly 20 years, the Army has had limited 

success in developing its information network of sensors, software, and 

radios to give soldiers and commanders exact information when they 

need it, in any environment, and thus improve situational awareness and 

decision making in combat. Under its current network modernization 

strategy, the Army is implementing a new agile process, intended to 

leverage industry technology solutions with less system development by 

the Army to field new and improved capabilities as they become 

available.

Due to the network’s cost and importance, the ambitious nature of the 

current network modernization strategy, and the department’s history with 

system acquisitions over the past decade, you asked us to examine 

elements of the new process the Army is using to acquire network 

capabilities. We have issued two products on these efforts. In our first 

report, we addressed issues related to the Army’s agile process.1

 1

GAO, Army Networks: Size and Scope of Modernization Investment Merit Increased 

Oversight, 

In our 

GAO-13-179 (Washington, D.C.: Jan. 10, 2013).
Page 2 GAO-14-460 Army Networks

second report, 2 we examined the Army’s Network Integration Evaluations 

(NIE), a key enabler of the agile process.3

In this third report, we examined the progress the Army has made in 

implementing competitive contracting strategies for tactical networking 

systems to allow soldiers to move mission-critical information between 

units.4

To conduct this work, we reviewed Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR) 

and Department of Defense (DOD) policies to identify documentation and 

procedures as a guide to assess the Army’s use of competitive 

contracting strategies. We looked for evidence that the Army had utilized 

some of the principles of competition in its acquisition strategies, but did 

not assess compliance with policy and federal acquisition regulations, for 

a non-generalizable sample of 9 of the 25 tactical networking systems by 

determining if DOD had developed the documentation. These systems 

are the Mid-Tier Networking Vehicular Radio, Soldier Radio Waveform—

Appliqué, Rifleman Radio, Manpack, Airborne and Maritime/Fixed Station, 

Joint Battle Command—Platform, the Nett Warrior, Warfighter Information 

Network—Tactical Increment 2, and Warfighter Information Network—

Tactical Increment 3. We selected these 9 systems because the Army 

has indicated they are critical systems for ensuring soldiers are able to 

send and receive mission-critical information between units and they 

cover the breadth of warfighter operations. Because this is a nongeneralizable sample, we are not projecting our findings across the 

universe of tactical networking systems. We reviewed Army market 

research reports, requests for information, acquisition strategies, contract 

award information, and briefings to senior Army officials. We 

independently researched accessibility of acquisition announcements on 

 2

GAO, Army Networks: Opportunities Exist to Better Utilize Results from Network 

Integration Evaluations, GAO-13-711 (Washington, D.C.: Aug. 22, 2013).

3 Network Integration Evaluations are held semi-annually and typically last about six 

weeks. NIEs provide a venue for operational testing of formal acquisition programs and for 

demonstrating government and industry provided systems under evaluation in an 

operational environment.

4 In addition to your interest in this area, the House Armed Services Committee’s report 

accompanying H.R. 1960, one of the bills for the National Defense Authorization Act for 

Fiscal Year 2014 also indicated an interest in the cost savings that could be realized 

through enhanced competition and alternative contracting mechanisms. H.R. Rep. No. 

113-102, at 9 (2013). 
Page 3 GAO-14-460 Army Networks

federal procurement opportunity web sites. We also interviewed key 

program officials to discuss both their consideration of competition in 

contracting strategies and their plan for engaging industry. A detailed 

description of our scope and methodology is included in appendix I.

We conducted this performance audit from August 2013 to May 2014 in 

accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. 

Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain 

sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our 

findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe that 

the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and 

conclusions based on our audit objectives.

Over the last decade, the Army focused most of its decisions to field 

network improvements on supporting operations in Iraq and 

Afghanistan—an effort that was both expensive and time consuming. The 

Army did not synchronize the development and fielding efforts for these 

network improvements and the funding and timelines for the associated 

acquisition activities were rarely, if ever, aligned. The Army’s efforts to 

develop networking capabilities fell far short of their objectives, resulting 

in what the Army believes was a loosely coordinated set of disparate 

sensors, applications, and services. The Army fielded capabilities in a 

piecemeal fashion and the user in the field was largely responsible for 

integrating them with existing technology. In other words, the Army had 

neither an overarching framework outlining its desired tactical networking 

capabilities nor a strategy for acquiring them.

In an effort to establish a requirements framework for acquiring its 

networking capabilities, the Army, in December 2011, finalized the 

Network-enabled Mission Command Initial Capabilities Document, a 

central document that describes the essential network capabilities 

required by the Army, as well as scores of capability gaps. These 

capabilities support an Army mission-command capability defined by a 

network of command posts, aerial and ground platforms, manned and 

unmanned sensors, and dismounted soldiers linked by an integrated suite 

of mission command systems. A robust transport layer capable of 

delivering voice, data, imagery, and video to the tactical edge (i.e., the 

forward battle lines) connects these systems.

The Army also developed a network strategy that changes the way it 

develops, evaluates, tests, and delivers networked capability to its 

operating forces, using an approach called capability set management. A 

capability set is a suite of network components, associated equipment, 

Background
Page 4 GAO-14-460 Army Networks

and software that provides an integrated network capability.5

Competition in contracting is a critical tool for achieving the best return on 

investment for taxpayers and can help save the taxpayer money, improve 

contractor performance, and promote accountability for results. Past GAO 

work has found that the federal government can realize significant cost 

savings when awarding contracts competitively. DOD also acknowledges 

specific benefits from competition, such as direct cost savings; improved 

product/service quality; enhanced solutions and industrial base; fairness 

and openness; prevention of fraud, waste, and abuse; and increased 

likelihood of efficiencies and innovation. Federal acquisition regulations 

require, with limited exceptions, that contracting officers shall promote 

and provide for full and open competition in soliciting offers and awarding 

government contracts.

With this 

approach, the Army plans to buy only what is currently available, feasible, 

and needed for units preparing to deploy, instead of developing an 

ultimate capability and buying enough to cover the entire force. Every 

year, the Army plans to integrate another capability set that reflects 

changes or advances in technology since the previous set. To support 

this approach, the Army has implemented the agile capabilities life-cycle 

process, which uses the identified capability gaps to solicit solutions from 

industry and government and then evaluate those solutions during the 

NIEs in consideration for later fielding to combat units. This process is 

quite different from the past Army methods in which the Army assumed 

beginning-to-end control of the design, development, test, and 

procurement of networking systems. Army officials expect the agile 

process and associated network integration evaluations to provide 

opportunities for greater industry involvement by allowing vendors to both 

propose solutions to address capability gaps and showcase their systems 

in a realistic environment. This allows the Army to identify and evaluate 

systems without the need for large investments in development programs 

and without having to enter into procurement contracts.

6

Federal acquisition regulations also require that agencies conduct market 

research, which DOD recognizes as a key to effective competition.

 5

Capability sets are numbered in sequence with the year they are fielded, so capability set 

13 was fielded beginning in 2013, capability set 14 is being fielded in 2014, and so on.

6

Full and open competition—achieved when all responsible sources are permitted to 

compete—is the preferred method for federal agencies to award contracts.
Page 5 GAO-14-460 Army Networks

According to the Defense Acquisition University, market research involves 

collecting and analyzing information about capabilities within the market 

to satisfy agency needs. It is a continuous process for gathering data on 

product characteristics, suppliers’ capabilities, and the business 

practices/trends that surround them—plus the analysis of that data to 

make smart acquisition decisions. Market research can vary across 

acquisitions given that the nature of the research depends on such 

factors as urgency, dollar value, complexity, and past experience. One 

such market research method allows for government to communicate its 

needs to industry and identify commercial items that could be used to 

satisfy those needs. The FAR outlines specific techniques for conducting 

market research. These could include, but are not limited to, consulting 

with government and industry subject-matter experts, publishing requests 

for information, or conducting interchange meetings with potential 

offerors, and hosting pre-solicitation conferences for potential offerors, 

which the Army has called industry days.

Congress passed the Weapon Systems Acquisition Reform Act of 2009, 

which outlines several congressionally-directed defense acquisition 

reforms related to competition.7 Subsequently, the Under Secretary of 

Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics issued an update to 

DOD acquisition policy, which provides direction and guidance on how 

program management will create and sustain a competitive environment 

at both the prime and subcontract level throughout the program’s life 

cycle.8 DOD policy requires programs to outline their market research in 

their acquisition strategies, which is the business and technical 

management framework for planning, directing, contracting for, and 

managing a program. Market research, in general, is a process for 

gathering data on, among other things, product characteristics, suppliers’

capabilities, and the business practices and trends that surround themplus the analysis of that data to make smart acquisition decisions.

 7

See, e.g., Pub. L. No. 111-23 §§ 202 and 203, as amended.

8

Interim Department of Defense Instruction No. 5000.02, Operation of the Defense 

Acquisition System (Nov. 25, 2013), which incorporated and canceled previously existing 

Department of Defense, Undersecretary of Defense (Acquisition, Technology, and 

Logistics), Directive-Type Memorandum (DTM) 09-027—Implementation of the Weapon 

Systems Acquisition Reform Act of 2009 (Washington, D.C.: Dec. 4, 2009) with the 

exception of Enclosure 9, which pertains to DOD’s acquisition of services.
Page 6 GAO-14-460 Army Networks

The Army is incorporating competition in various ways for most of the 

nine tactical networking acquisition programs we examined. As the Army 

decreases the amount of in-house system development it is doing for 

tactical networking equipment, it is using various tools to involve industry 

in seeking items that the Army does not pay to develop to meet its needs.

One such tool is the agile capabilities life cycle process and the 

associated semi-annual Network Integration Evaluations (NIEs), which 

serve as market research to identify potential solutions to meet capability 

gaps. This process relies heavily on industry for success, thus providing 

opportunities for enhancing competition when procuring new tactical 

networking capabilities. The Army has also reached out to industry to 

identify small businesses with the skills, experience, knowledge, and 

capabilities required to manage, maintain, operate, sustain, and support 

several tactical networking systems. Two of the Army networking systems 

are new programs that are building their acquisition approaches around 

competition and leveraging contracting mechanisms that Army officials 

believe will enhance competition. Five other networking systems have 

modified their acquisition approaches in ways that would incorporate 

greater levels of competition. This includes reaching out to industry to 

provide potential solutions, and competing the procurement of individual 

components. The two remaining systems have incorporated competition 

at some point in their past development efforts, but the Army has 

determined that expanding competition at this stage is not feasible or cost 

effective. In these cases, the Army continues to engage with industry to 

identify potential vendors for future components of these systems.

Table 1 contains a list of the nine systems in our review and provides a 

brief description of each. Appendix II contains more detailed information 

about the nine systems in our review.

Table 1: Description of Selected Army Tactical Networking Systems

Tactical networking system Description

Mid-Tier Networking Vehicular Radio 

(MNVR)

The Mid-Tier Networking Vehicular Radio will be a multichannel vehicular radio that will 

provide networking capability to connect unmanned sensors to decision makers on the 

move, which could significantly reduce decision-making time. MNVR will also provide an 

Internet-like mobile ad-hoc networking capability and will be interoperable with current 

force radios through simultaneous and secure voice, data, and video communications. 

Soldier Radio Waveform (SRW) Appliqué The SRW Appliqué Radio System is a single channel, vehicular mounted, softwaredefined radio for use by brigade combat teams. It provides a bridge for SRW radios to 

interface with units equipped with legacy systems, such as the Single Channel Ground 

and Airborne Radio System radios. SRW-Appliqué runs the soldier radio waveform and 

acts as a conduit for transmitting voice and data between the dismounted soldier, his unit, 

and higher headquarters.

Army Utilizing 

Competition in 

Various Ways Across 

Nine Tactical 

Networking Systems
Page 7 GAO-14-460 Army Networks

Tactical networking system Description

Airborne and Maritime/Fixed Station (AMF) AMF products are software programmable, multi-band, multi-mode mobile networking 

radios, providing simultaneous voice, data and video communications for Army aviation 

platforms.

Rifleman Radio The Rifleman Radio is a single-channel handheld networking radio with a global 

positioning system receiver that uses the soldier radio waveform and allows leaders and 

soldiers to form ad-hoc communications networks in order to exchange voice, video, and 

data during all aspects of military operations.

Manpack The Manpack radio is a two-channel radio with military global positioning system that is 

capable of operating at various transmission frequencies, which allows Soldiers to 

participate in voice and data communications networks as well as transmit position 

location information. 

Joint Battle Command-Platform (JBC-P) The JBC-P provides joint forces command and control and situational awareness 

capability at the platform level and enables mission accomplishment across the entire 

spectrum of joint military operations. JBC-P provides continuous near real-time 

identification of friendly locations to populate the joint common operating picture. JBC-P 

provides tactical chat with chat room capability resulting in enhanced collaboration for 

commanders; mission command applications for planning and execution; a graphical 

interface with improved display of maps and images; enhanced situational awareness 

between mobile platforms, tactical operation centers, and dismounted soldiers equipped 

with Nett Warrior; and ruggedized equipment.

Nett Warrior The Nett Warrior is an integrated dismounted leader situational awareness system for 

use during combat operations. It allows for faster and more accurate decisions in the 

tactical fight.

Warfighter Information Network-Tactical 

(WIN-T) Increment 2

WIN-T, which is developing multiple increments of capability, employs a combination of 

terrestrial, airborne, and satellite-based transport options to connect all users. WIN-T 

Increment 2 provides commercial and military band satellite communications to Division, 

Brigade, Battalion and Company units while also providing on-the-move capability and a 

mobile infrastructure. It further provides satellite communications and supports limited 

collaboration and mission planning.

Warfighter Information Network-Tactical 

(WIN-T) Increment 3

WIN-T Increment 3 develops the network operations software to enable seamless 

integration of tactical network functions, and enhanced waveforms for increased 

throughput capability. These enhancements will be provided as technical insertions to

previous WIN-T Increments. 

Source: U.S. Army (data); GAO (analysis and presentation).

Eight of the nine systems we reviewed have either completed an 

acquisition strategy or have one in draft, and all include language that 

pertain to market research and competition as required by DOD policy. 

The Army has not developed an acquisition strategy for SRW-Appliqué 

because it does not meet the requirements of a formal acquisition 

program. Rather, the Army has developed a plan to deliver a radio 

waveform capability to satisfy a directed requirement, has used market 

research, and is seeking competition for this system, as discussed below. 

Table 2 presents the status of the acquisition strategy for the nine 

systems.
Page 8 GAO-14-460 Army Networks

Table 2: Status of Army Systems’ Acquisition Strategies

System Status of acquisition strategy

Mid-Tier Networking Vehicular Radio 

Soldier Radio Waveform Appliquéa 

Airborne and Maritime/Fixed Station 

Rifleman Radiob 

Manpackb 

Joint Battle Command-Platform 

Nett Warrior 

Wideband Information Network-Tactical Increment 2 

Wideband Information Network-Tactical Increment 3 

Legend:  = completed;  = in draft;  = not planned.

Source: U.S. Army (data); GAO (analysis and presentation).

a

According to Army officials, they created an acquisition plan in lieu of an acquisition strategy 

because Soldier Radio Waveform Appliqué is not a formal acquisition program. Defense Federal 

Acquisition Regulation Supplement requires officials to prepare written acquisition plans for 

acquisitions for development when the total cost of all contracts for the acquisition program is 

estimated at $10 million or more and for acquisitions for production or services when the total cost of 

all contracts for the acquisition program is estimated at $50 million or more for all years or $25 million 

or more for any fiscal year. The Army has used competitive procedures and market research, as 

discussed below.

b

The Rifleman Radio and Manpack Radio are both included within the Handheld, Manpack, and Small 

Form Fit (HMS) acquisition strategy.

In two of the cases we examined, the Army is beginning new programs, 

structuring the acquisition strategies to focus on competition, and 

procuring directly from industry. One of these systems, the Mid-Tier 

Networking Vehicular Radio (MNVR), will provide a subset of functionality 

the Army intended to get from the Joint Tactical Radio System (JTRS) 

Ground Mobile Radio (GMR), which was canceled in 2011. The other 

system, SRW Appliqué, augments the capabilities of existing radios and 

allows them to communicate with newer, software-defined radios.

The MNVR represents a subset of functionality that was demonstrated in 

the JTRS Ground Mobile Radio (GMR) program. The Army has a directed 

requirement to procure MNVR to provide secure communications.

Accordingly, on September 24, 2013, following full and open competition, 

the Army awarded an MNVR production contract. The Army used the 

initial delivery order from this contract to procure a limited number of radio 

systems to conduct risk reduction and requirements verification. The 

acquisition strategy contains summary information regarding plans for 

competition and market research and states that follow-on production 

contracts are expected to use a full-and-open competition strategy.

Army Initiating Two New 

Systems Predicated on 

Competition and Off-theshelf Acquisitions

Mid-Tier Networking Vehicular 

Radio
Page 9 GAO-14-460 Army Networks

Two vendors sent SRW Appliqué radios through the Army’s Network 

Integration Evaluation in 2011, which the Army has described as a 

mechanism for market research. In March 2012, the Army finalized 

market research to identify sources for the production and delivery of 

approximately 5,000 radios to satisfy a directed requirement for a soldier 

radio waveform capability.9 The associated indefinite delivery, indefinite 

quantity contracts were competitively awarded in April 2014 to four 

vendors.

10 Additionally, in 2013, the Army also purchased SRW Appliqué 

radios off the General Services Administration schedule for demonstration 

at a Network Integration Evaluation in May 2014 and operational testing 

at a Network Integration Evaluation in November 2014. 11

AMF, Rifleman Radio, and Manpack were all part of the restructured 

JTRS program, which utilized competition early on to develop softwaredefined radios that would interoperate with existing radios and increase 

communications and networking capabilities. Before the Army began 

restructuring the JTRS program in 2011, it encountered a number of 

technical challenges that resulted in cost growth and schedule delays. 

Consequently, the Army is now reaching out to industry for proposed 

solutions. The Army has also adjusted its approach for the Joint Battle 

Command-Platform (JBC-P) and Nett Warrior programs and assumed the 

role of integrator. In this capacity, the Army is purchasing individual 

components from industry and integrating them together to build the 

systems. According to the Army, all of the contract orders for both 

systems over fiscal years 2012 and 2013 were awarded using full and 

open competition.

 9 The Army can prepare directed requirements in cases where a specific limited but 

necessary urgent need exists. Per Army regulation, the scope of a directed requirement 

will be limited to addressing urgent operational needs that fall outside the established Joint 

Capabilities Integration and Development System requirements process and if not 

addressed immediately will seriously endanger personnel or pose a major threat to the 

success of ongoing operations. Army Regulation 71-9, Warfighter Capabilities 

Determination (Dec. 28, 2009).

10An IDIQ contract is a type of indefinite delivery contract that provides for an indefinite 

quantity of supplies or services within stated limits, during a fixed period. 

11In accordance with FAR 6.102(d)(3), use of the GSA Schedules Program is considered a 

“competitive procedure” under the Competition in Contracting Act of 1984 when the GSA 

Schedule ordering procedures are followed.

SRW Appliqué

Army Modifying 

Approaches to Create 

Opportunities for 

Competition for Five 

Legacy Networking 

Systems
Page 10 GAO-14-460 Army Networks

Initially, Army officials believed there was only one source that could 

produce a particular AMF variant, but they later used market research to 

identify a second potential source that was interested in competing for 

that system. The acquisition strategy for that variant now states that full 

and open competition and best value procedures will be used when 

awarding contracts, with an emphasis on modified non-developmental 

solutions. To continue efforts to identify potential sources to fulfill this 

requirement, the Army has also posted pre-solicitations for industry

comment and hosted interested vendors at industry days to discuss draft 

Requests for Proposals (RFP) and answer any non competition-sensitive 

question about the pending solicitation.

Both DOD and Congress have pressed for additional competition for the 

Rifleman Radio. In the Conference Report of the National Defense 

Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013, the conferees noted strong 

agreement with the direction provided by certain DOD and Army 

documents regarding the conduct of full and open competition within the 

JTRS program, which included the Rifleman Radio. The Army modified 

the acquisition strategy to reflect the push for added competition, which 

entailed developing a competition strategy, conducting market research, 

releasing draft solicitations, and holding industry days. Consequently, the 

full-rate production decision was delayed from May 2012 to the second 

quarter of fiscal year 2017. The Army is currently receiving low-rate initial 

production units. Army planning documents indicate plans for full and 

open competition and IDIQ contracts for the subsequent full-rate 

production units. Further, the Army anticipates releasing the RFP by June 

2014 and awarding contracts by March 2015. The Army has also posted 

requests for information to seek industry feedback on documentation 

required for potential future solicitations as well as hosted industry days 

for added market research.

As with Rifleman Radio, the DOD and the Congress have encouraged 

increased competition for the Manpack, which was also part of the JTRS 

system. The Army is currently receiving low-rate initial production units. 

However, the full-rate decision has slipped to the fourth quarter of fiscal 

year 2017. According to the Army, this resulted from congressional 

direction for full and open competition of the full-rate production units, 

which involve several activities noted above. In addition, delayed approval 

of the acquisition strategy postponed the RFP, which is expected to occur 

Airborne and Maritime/Fixed 

Station

Rifleman Radio

Manpack
Page 11 GAO-14-460 Army Networks

by September 2014.12

The JBC-P is largely a software development effort that will utilize existing 

hardware from a predecessor system. However, it will also incorporate 

new hardware such as a new tablet computer and a beacon device for 

situational awareness data. Wherever possible, the Army plans to use 

existing, competitively awarded Army contracts to procure new hardware. 

The Army contracted with the Software Engineering Institute to assess 

the capabilities of several software development organizations, ultimately 

selecting the Software Engineering Directorate at Redstone Arsenal to

develop JBC-P software.

The Army has reached out to industry to identify 

sources for sustainment of Manpack radios, solicited feedback on 

documentation required for future solicitations, and hosted industry days.

13 According to Army officials, any necessary 

software that is beyond the directorate’s capabilities will be competed to 

industry. Army officials told us they also have plans to compete the blueforce tracker 2 component, which is the Army’s latest system for tracking 

the location of friendly forces. During fiscal years 2012 and 2013, the 

Army made 15 contract awards, 13 of which were awarded using full and 

open competition and the remaining 2 were awarded using full and open 

competition after exclusion of sources.14

The Nett Warrior acquisition strategy describes the program’s planned 

approach for engaging in market research, including Internet-based 

searches, manufacturer site visits, and requests for information via the 

Federal Business Opportunities website—federal agencies’ primary tool 

Army officials told us some 

vendors were automatically excluded from competition because they 

failed to meet certain criteria, such as security classification. These 

contract awards covered a variety of items, including miscellaneous 

communications equipment, cables, system configuration services, and 

other information technology equipment and services. The Army also 

conducted market research to identify a second source for armored and 

Stryker brigade combat team installation kits, which, according to Army 

officials, saved $900,000 per brigade.

 12 The Handheld, Manpack, and Small Form Fit (HMS) Acquisition Strategy, which 

includes both Rifleman Radio and Manpack, was approved May 1, 2014.

13 The Software Engineering Institute is a nationally recognized, federally funded research 

and development center established at Carnegie Mellon University to address software 

engineering practices.

14 FAR Subpart 6.2.

Joint Battle Command-Platform

Nett Warrior
Page 12 GAO-14-460 Army Networks

for soliciting potential offers. Major Nett Warrior components include the 

Rifleman Radio and the end user device, which is a smartphone-like 

device. According to documents provided by the Army, the program has 

already competed the procurement of end user devices. Army documents 

show that the Army has made a number of other purchases such as 

cases, secure digital memory cards, and styluses competitively. The 

Army is acquiring radios from a current vendor for the Nett Warrior 

program as government-furnished equipment but plans to purchase other 

hardware and software-related items competitively.

The Warfighter Information Network-Tactical (WIN-T) connects soldiers in 

theater with higher levels of command via line-of-sight and satellite-based 

communications. For WIN-T Increments 2 and 3, the Army has 

determined that competition for the overall system is impractical, although 

aspects of competition are still being used on the programs. When the 

WIN-T program was in system development, the Army contracted with 

two separate companies to develop competing designs for the system. In 

August 2004, the Army combined the two designs in order to develop a 

system with attributes from both and proceeded with a single contractor 

after the two contractors teamed to establish a single architecture for 

WIN-T that leveraged each contractor’s proposed architecture to provide 

the Army with what it believed was a superior technical solution for WINT. An updated acquisition strategy for WIN-T includes language that 

describes plans for both market research and competition.

Pursuant to a DOD acquisition decision memorandum, the Army 

conducted a business case analysis to provide a recommendation with 

the least development and procurement cost and greatest benefit to the 

Army for the follow-on production of WIN-T Increment 2. Based on the 

analysis, the Army concluded that a sole source contract with competition 

at the subcontract level was most appropriate. The Army’s market 

research led it to conclude that only one contractor, the incumbent, is 

capable of providing the WIN-T capability. Federal acquisition regulations 

permit contracting without providing for full and open competition for DOD 

in cases where only one responsible source or a limited number of 

sources, and no other supplies or services will satisfy agency 

requirements.15

 15 FAR Subpart 6.3.

Furthermore, based on market research, government 

Army Deemed 

Competition Impractical for 

WIN-T Increments 2 and 3
Page 13 GAO-14-460 Army Networks

technical experts determined that there are no new technologies being 

developed that can meet WIN-T Increment 3 requirements. However, the 

Army is awarding contracts for numerous items that support WIN-T, many 

of which are awarded competitively.

We are not making recommendations in this report. We provided a draft 

of this report to DOD for their review and comment. DOD provided written 

comments, which are reproduced in Appendix III. These comments 

provided updated and clarifying information on a few of the systems in our 

review. We incorporated these and other technical comments in the 

report, as appropriate.

We are sending copies of this report to the appropriate congressional 

committees, the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of the Army, and 

other interested parties. In addition, the report will be available at no 

charge on GAO’s website at http://www.gao.gov.

If you or your staff have any questions about this report, please contact 

Belva Martin at (202) 512-4841 or martinb@gao.gov. Contact points for 

our offices of Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on 

the last page of this report. GAO staff who made key contributions to this 

report are listed in appendix IV.

Belva M. Martin

Director, Acquisition and Sourcing Management

Agency Comments
Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and 

Methodology

Page 14 GAO-14-460 Army Networks

Our objective was to examine the Army’s progress in implementing 

competitive contracting strategies for its network-related systems, in 

particular for its radio capabilities. To address this objective, we selected 

nine of the Army’s 25 tactical networking systems as a non-generalizable 

sample for review. These systems are the Mid-Tier Networking Vehicular 

Radio, Soldier Radio Waveform—Appliqué, Rifleman Radio, Manpack, 

Airborne and Maritime/Fixed Station, Joint Battle Command—Platform, 

the Nett Warrior, Warfighter Information Network—Tactical Increment 2, 

and Warfighter Information Network—Tactical Increment 3. We chose 

these systems for a variety of reasons. These systems exist on either the 

tactical network’s transport or applications level and the Army has 

indicated they are critical systems for ensuring soldiers are able to move 

mission-critical information between units. They are also a subset of the 

systems that constituted over $3.6 billion in Army spending in fiscal year 

2014 and several of them may also be included in capability set 14.1

We reviewed Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR) and Department of 

Defense (DOD) policies to identify documentation and procedures as a 

guide to assess the Army’s use of competitive contracting strategies. We 

reviewed program acquisition strategies to determine how the programs 

plan to use market research and competition. While we did not attempt to 

assess compliance with policy and federal acquisition regulations for any 

of these programs, we did identify examples in acquisition strategies 

where the Army has utilized or intends to utilize competition. We reviewed 

Army market research reports, requests for information, acquisition 

strategies, contract award information, and briefings to senior Army 

officials. We reviewed acquisition decision memoranda to identify key 

programmatic decisions that affect contracting strategies. We reviewed 

defense acquisition training materials designed to enhance competition in 

defense programs. We interviewed Army acquisition personnel and 

discussed both their consideration of competition in contracting strategies 

and their plan for engaging industry. We independently researched 

accessibility of acquisition announcements on federal procurement 

opportunity web sites. We reviewed market research strategies for 

identifying the contractors with the ability to provide networking solutions 

These nine programs also cover the breadth of operations from the 

warfighter at the tactical edge to the brigade command post.

 1 Capability sets are numbered in sequence with the year they are fielded, so capability 

set 13 was fielded beginning in 2013, capability set 14 is being fielded in 2014, and so on.

Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and 

Methodology
Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and 

Methodology

Page 15 GAO-14-460 Army Networks

and alternative courses of actions the Army considered for meeting 

networking requirements.

We conducted this performance audit from August 2013 to May 2014 in 

accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. 

Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain 

sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our 

findings and conclusions, based on our audit objectives. We believe that 

the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and 

conclusions based on our audit objectives.
Appendix II: Supplemental Information for Nine 

Army Networking Systems

Page 16 GAO-14-460 Army Networks

The Mid-Tier Networking Vehicular Radio (MNVR) will host the 

Department of Defense’s (DOD) Joint Tactical Radio System1 (JTRS) 

Wideband Networking and Soldier Radio waveforms to connect 

unmanned sensors to decision makers on the move, which is expected to 

significantly reduce the decision-making time. MNVR will also provide a 

mobile Internet-like ad-hoc networking capability and will be interoperable 

with current soldier radios though simultaneous and secure voice, data, 

and video communications. MNVR will support Battle Command, sensorto-shooter, sustainment and survivability applications in a full range of 

military operations on vehicular platforms. The program includes specific 

requirements to support the U.S. Army, Brigade Combat Teams, and the

warfighter.

The MNVR represents a subset of functionality that was successfully 

demonstrated in the JTRS Ground Mobile Radio (GMR) program. The 

Army reported that lessons learned from recent operational experiences 

have shown that a significant capability gap exists at the company level in 

Brigade Combat Teams in the inability of legacy tactical radios to 

seamlessly pass real-time information throughout the range of military 

operations. To address this capability gap, the Army initiated its GMR 

program; however, due to poor performance and rising costs, the Under 

Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics directed 

the Army to establish a new program that manages the evaluations, 

testing, and delivery of non developmental item products to meet the 

reduced set of capabilities to be fielded to operational units in fiscal year 

2014. This program is the Mid-Tier Networking Vehicular Radio that will 

host the JTRS networking waveforms. The MNVR program achieved a 

Material Development Decision in September 2013 and the program 

awarded a MNVR radio production contract. The initial Increment 1 

Delivery Order2

 1

The Department of Defense’s Joint Tactical Radio System is a family of common, 

interoperable, and modular software defined radios which operate as nodes in a network 

to ensure secure wireless communication and networking services for mobile and fixed 

forces.

procures a limited number of MNVR radio systems to 

begin risk reduction developmental testing and requirements verification 

testing. The acquisition has two components, (1) the manufacture, 

testing, and delivery of the radio and associated hardware (B-kit) and (2) 

2 A delivery order is an order for supplies placed against an established contract or with 

government sources.

Appendix II: Supplemental Information for 

Nine Army Networking Systems

Mid-Tier Networking 

Vehicular Radio

Background
Appendix II: Supplemental Information for Nine 

Army Networking Systems

Page 17 GAO-14-460 Army Networks

the manufacture and testing of the adaption kit (A-kit) that mounts the Bkit to the intended platforms. Three delivery orders are planned for the Bkit:

• Delivery order 1—Provides procurement of a limited number of MNVR 

systems to undergo Government verification testing, and limited user 

test. Provides assets to support the development of vehicle 

installation kits by platform integrators and to meet various 

certification requirements.

• Delivery order 2—Successful limited user test results will inform a 

Milestone C decision and support an initial operational test and 

evaluation.

• Delivery order 3—Successful initial operational test and evaluation 

results will inform a full-rate production decision to procure assets to 

field systems to Capability Sets 17 and 18.

Acquisition category: Non-Major Defense Acquisition Program ACAT 

ID, Special Interest.3

Acquisition phase: Production

Procurement award: September 2013

Contractor: Harris Corporation

Contract type: Hardware—indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) 

with firm-fixed-price (FFP)

Total program: $1,304.5 million

 3 DOD categorizes weapon systems to determine the level of review, decision authority, 

and applicable procedures. An acquisition program is designated category I when the 

dollar value for all increments of the program are estimated to require an eventual total 

expenditure for research, development, and test and evaluation of more than $480 million 

in fiscal year 2014 constant dollars or, for procurement, of more than $2.79 billion in fiscal 

year 2014 constant dollars. An acquisition program can also be designated category I as 

special interest on the basis of factors such as technological complexity or large 

commitment of resources. While the MNVR is not projected to meet these category 1 

spending levels, the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and 

Logistics designated MNVR as an acquisition category ID special interest program. The 

Milestone Decision Authority is the Defense Acquisition Executive, or a delegate. The “D” 

refers to the Defense Acquisition Board, which advises the Defense Acquisition Executive 

at major decision points.

Program Status
Appendix II: Supplemental Information for Nine 

Army Networking Systems

Page 18 GAO-14-460 Army Networks

Research and development: $109.1 million

Procurement: $1,195.4 million

Quantity: Estimated procurement of 10,293 radios

Next major program event: MNVR will participate in NIE 14.2 in May 

2014 as a risk reduction exercise. A limited user test is scheduled for the 

first quarter of fiscal year 2015.

In February 2012, the Army revalidated the need for a mid-tier wideband 

networking radio for brigade combat teams to fill the gap created by the 

cancellation of the Ground Mobile Radio. The Army conducted a 

cost/benefit analysis for three options and concluded that a new MNVR 

procurement was the best solution. The Army posted a pre-solicitation 

notice and later posted the request for proposals. On August 27, 2012, 

the Under Secretary of the Army determined that full and open 

competition would be used to make a single award for a firm fixed price, 

IDIQ contract for a MNVR.4

 4 IDIQ contract defined at FN 10, p. 9

According to the Army, such a contract 

instrument would not obligate the Army to procure large quantities of 

units. Rather, it would allow the Army to purchase only what is needed in 

the near-term through delivery orders. It also provides the Army the 

opportunity to infuse technology as it becomes available into future 

delivery orders. On September 24, 2013, following full and open 

competition, the Army awarded a MNVR production contract to Harris 

Corporation valued at up to $140 million. The Army included a clause in 

the contract that makes Harris responsible for all government and 

contractor costs related to follow-on verification testing, to include the 

costs of any associated retesting required by failures. The contract has a 

3 to 5 year ordering period. The Army expects that after 3 to 5 years, 

advancements in operating system software, power amplifiers, digital 

processing, as well as advancements in waveform capabilities will evolve 

to the point that defense stakeholders will consider revising the governing

requirements document and will coordinate to determine the need for an 

updated requirement and a new procurement. If stakeholders determine 

the need for a new procurement, MNVR will pursue industry competition 

with a full and open solicitation.

Competition History and 

Plans
Appendix II: Supplemental Information for Nine 

Army Networking Systems

Page 19 GAO-14-460 Army Networks

The Soldier Radio Waveform (SRW) Appliqué Radio System is a single 

channel, vehicular mounted, software-defined radio for use by brigade 

combat teams. It is essentially a data transmission module that can be 

mounted into certain vehicle configurations of current Single Channel 

Ground and Airborne Radio System radios that have no capability to send 

or receive data. SRW-Appliqué runs the JTRS soldier radio waveform and 

acts as a conduit for transmitting voice and data between the dismounted 

soldier, the soldier’s unit, and higher headquarters. SRW-Appliqué is 

intended to interact seamlessly with the Rifleman Radio, which is carried 

by platoon, squad-level, and team-level soldiers, and which also runs the 

SRW. The Army plans to integrate the SRW-Appliqué radios with multiple 

vehicle platforms for fielding flexibility.

In May 2011, the Army issued a directed requirement for a soldier radio 

waveform capability. Two vendors offered systems that the Army 

ultimately evaluated at a Network Integration Evaluation in October and 

November 2011. The operational need for SRW-Appliqué was confirmed 

by the systems’ participation at this event.

Acquisition category: NA-Commodity Buy

Acquisition phase: Procurement

Procurement contract award: April 2014

Contractor: Contracting team of Exelis, General Dynamics, Harris

Corporation, and Thales

Total program: Estimated $800 million to $900 million

Quantity: Estimated procurement of 5,000 radios

Next major program event: Source selection and contract award.

Using full and open competition, the Army plans to award multiple multiyear indefinite delivery, indefinite quantity contracts with a firm-fixed-price 

for SRW-Appliqué radios. In March 2012, the Army finalized market 

research results and concluded that only five of the 10 interested vendors 

were capable of providing the requisite SRW radio system. In June 2012, 

the Army posted a presolicitation notifying industry of plans to publish a 

SRW Appliqué

Background

Program Status

Competition History and 

Plans
Appendix II: Supplemental Information for Nine 

Army Networking Systems

Page 20 GAO-14-460 Army Networks

request for proposal, which it did in October 2012. The Army is 

considering the use of on ramps and off ramps in the contract so new 

vendors can be added or underperforming vendors can be removed.5 The 

government-owned SRW will be made available to contractors for 

integration onto their existing hardware solutions.

AMF products are software programmable, multi-band, multi-mode mobile 

networking radios, providing simultaneous voice, data and video 

communications for Army aviation platforms. The radios will operate in 

networks supporting the Common Operational Picture, situational 

awareness, and interoperability of Mission Command Systems. The AMF

program will procure two non-developmental radios to meet user needs. 

One radio, Small Airborne Link 16 Terminal (SALT), will possess Link 16 

and SRW capability. The second, Small Airborne Networking Radio 

(SANR), will provide networking and legacy waveform capability. SALT 

will provide one channel dedicated to a Link 16 capability and a second 

software-defined radio channel that can host SRW. SANR will provide a 

two-channel software-defined radio that provides interoperability with the 

Army’s Mid-tier Networking Waveform capability that will be widely 

deployed to ground forces. The radio will be installed on AH-64E Apache,

UH-60M/L Black Hawk, CH-47F Chinook, and OH-58F Kiowa Warrior 

helicopters in addition to the MQ-1C Gray Eagle unmanned aircraft 

system.

The AMF program was restructured in accordance with Milestone 

Decision Authority direction dated May 2012 and July 2012. The May 

2012 decision memorandum directed the closeout of the AMF system 

development and demonstration contract awarded in March 2008. The 

July 2012 decision memorandum approved a non-developmental item 

 5

According to the SRW Appliqué performance work statement, the contracting officer may, 

if it is in the best interest of the government, conduct an “on ramp” to add additional 

contract holders to the SRW Appliqué contract, subject to certain criteria. For instance, 

notice of an on ramp, containing a solicitation, is to be publicized on an Army website for 

industry. Also, the award of any new contract cannot increase the overall ceiling of the 

basic contract. Conversely, if a contractor does not participate in the ordering process as 

expected and successfully perform the terms of their orders, the contracting officer may 

“off ramp” the contractor by executing a no-cost settlement, terminate for convenience, or 

implement a termination for default, if applicable.

Airborne and 

Maritime/Fixed 

Station

Background
Appendix II: Supplemental Information for Nine 

Army Networking Systems

Page 21 GAO-14-460 Army Networks

acquisition approach leveraging previous industry investment in tactical 

radio technology.

AMF will operate networking waveforms and select waveforms that are 

widely deployed by Joint Forces today, enable interoperability between 

different types of platforms, and transport information through the tactical 

network to joint network member nodes. The Army has determined that 

the need for interoperable systems, including common waveforms, 

software applications, and network operations is critical to the mobile 

tactical network capability.

Acquisition category: ACAT ID

Acquisition phase: Pre-solicitation for production

System development contract award: March 2008

Contractor: Lockheed Martin6

Contract type: Cost-plus-award-fee

Total program: $3,582.7 million

Research and development: $1,849.3 million

Procurement: $1,733.4 million

Quantity: 7,720 radios, which is 15,440 channels

Next major program event: SALT production and SANR low-rate initial 

production decisions in first quarter 2016.

The Army developed two AMF variants—the SALT and the SANR. The 

SALT is intended as a 2-channel radio capable of running the Link 16 and 

SRW waveforms. The Army intends to install the 2-channel Link 16 and 

SRW capable AMF SALT radios on all AH-64E aircraft starting with Lot 6.

 6 The Lockheed Martin system development contract period of performance expired as of 

August 31, 2013 and is in the process of being closed out by the Defense Contract 

Management Agency.

Program Status

Competition History and 

Plans
Appendix II: Supplemental Information for Nine 

Army Networking Systems

Page 22 GAO-14-460 Army Networks

The SANR is also a 2-channel radio capable of utilizing the Single 

Channel Ground and Airborne Radio System, Soldier Radio, and 

Wideband Networking Waveforms. The radio will be installed on AH-64E 

Apache Block III, UH-60M/L Black Hawk, CH-47F Chinook, and OH-58F 

Kiowa Warrior helicopters, in addition to the MQ-1C Gray Eagle 

unmanned aerial system.

In March 2008, the Program Office awarded Lockheed Martin Corporation 

a cost-plus-award-fee contract through full and open competition. The 

basic contract was to acquire the complete JTRS Software Defined Radio 

system and subsystems in accordance with the 2006 JTRS Operational 

Requirements Document with the option to add capability packages for 

additional platform requirements. In September 2011, the Milestone 

Decision Authority (MDA) directed a program and contract restructure in 

order to meet the requirements. AMF then conducted market research on 

potential non-developmental Item solutions for Army Aviation. Market 

research showed less complex non developmental solutions would be 

available to meet revised user requirements and identified an additional 

vendor who was interested in competing.

AMF conducted market research for the SALT radio, advising industry of 

the pending acquisition and soliciting inquiries from interested parties. 

AMF received and analyzed market survey data and initially determined a 

competitive approach in support of the planned SALT procurement for the 

PM Apache AH-64E Lot 6, was not feasible. On June 24, 2013, via 

Federal Business Opportunities, the government announced its intention 

to solicit on a sole source basis. In response to the synopsis, another 

vendor indicated its interest in the acquisition. Based on information 

presented by the second vendor, the Government concluded the SALT 

contract strategy should be full and open competition. The Army posted a 

revised solicitation notifying industry that the award would be competed 

and posted the draft request for proposals on January 17, 2014. On 

February 3, 2014, under an update to the same solicitation, the Army 

notified interested vendors that it would be hosting a pre-solicitation 

conference at Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland, in order to address 

any non-competition sensitive questions about the draft request for 

proposals. The Army anticipated issuing the formal request for proposals

by March 3, 2014, and contracts by September 2014, but this has been 

delayed due to the lack of an approved acquisition strategy. The Army 

plans to award, via full and open competition, a single firm-fixedprice/cost-plus-fixed-fee hybrid type contract with a one-year base period 

and three one-year option periods for delivery of low-rate production and 

full-rate production quantities of SALT systems, spares and associated 
Appendix II: Supplemental Information for Nine 

Army Networking Systems

Page 23 GAO-14-460 Army Networks

services. The program office estimates that the SALT full-rate production 

contract will be awarded in fiscal year 2017.

According to a September 17, 2013, presolicitation announcement, the 

Army anticipates awarding two firm-fixed-price/cost-plus-fixed-fee hybrid 

type contracts with a one-year base period and four one-year option 

periods for SANR. The Army anticipated issuing a request for proposals 

by December 2, 2013, but the SANR solicitation schedule is being 

reassessed as a result of the budget estimate submissions. The Army

would later down select to a single contractor to deliver both low-rate 

initial production units and full-rate production units.

The Army’s Handheld, Manpack, and Small Form Fit (HMS) program 

evolved from the JTRS program and provides software-programmable 

digital radios to support the Army’s tactical communications requirements. 

The Rifleman Radio is a handheld, networking radio. In addition to 

functioning as a stand-alone, handheld radio, the Army intends the 

AN/PRC-154A variant to be the radio used as part of the Nett Warrior 

program. Both the Secret and unclassified variants of the Rifleman Radio 

are single-channel radios with a commercial global positioning system 

receiver that operate at various transmission frequencies using the SRW,

which enables the radios to form an ad-hoc data and voice 

communications network with other SRW-capable radios. Army leaders 

and Soldiers use Rifleman Radios to communicate and create networks 

to exchange voice, video, and data using the SRW during all aspects of 

military operations

The JTRS HMS program meets the radio requirements for Soldiers and 

small platforms (such as missiles and ground sensors). JTRS HMS 

Increment 1 is structured as a single program of record with two phases. 

Phase 1 developed Small Form Fit and a Rifleman Radio for use in a 

sensitive but unclassified environment. Phase 2 is for the 2-Channel 

Manpack and small form fit-B for use in a classified environment. JTRS 

HMS will provide new networking capability to the individual Soldiers, 

Marines, Sailors and Airmen and also continue to provide legacy radio 

interoperability. JTRS HMS provides the warfighter with a software 

reprogrammable, networkable multi-mode system capable of 

simultaneous voice, data and video communications. The program 

encompasses specific requirements to support the US Army, US Navy, 

US Marine Corps, US Air Force and the Special Operations Command 

communication needs.

Rifleman Radio

Background
Appendix II: Supplemental Information for Nine 

Army Networking Systems

Page 24 GAO-14-460 Army Networks

Acquisition category: ACAT ID, as part of HMS program

Acquisition phase: Production

System development contract award: July 2004

Contractor: General Dynamics C4 Systems Inc.

Contract type: Cost-Plus-Award-Fee

Low-rate production contract: June 2011

Contract type: Firm-Fixed-Price

Total program (fiscal years 2013-2019): $361.26 million

Quantity (fiscal years 2013-2019): 37,849

Next major program event: Draft request for proposal third quarter FY 

2014

The Army continues to receive low rate units from the June 2011 contract; 

however, Army officials say that because of the Congressional direction 

for full and open competition, the full rate production decision has been 

delayed to allow for changes in the program acquisition strategy. The 

program is coordinating with DOD officials on a competition strategy prior 

to solicitation for procurement.

The Army plans to award multiple fixed-price contracts to all qualified 

vendors using a two-step sealed bid process. Further, the Army plans to 

award initial delivery orders for qualification testing and operational 

assessment and award full rate production orders based on operational 

assessments and best value. The full-rate production review for the 

Rifleman Radio, which was initially expected to take place in May 2012, is 

now expected to begin in January 2015.

The HMS program evolved from the JTRS program and provides 

software-programmable digital radios to support tactical communications 

requirements. The Manpack radio is a two-channel radio with military 

global positioning system that is capable of operating at various 

transmission frequencies using the SRW, the legacy Single Channel 

Ground and Airborne Radio System waveform, and current military 

Program Status

Competition History and 

Plans

Manpack
Appendix II: Supplemental Information for Nine 

Army Networking Systems

Page 25 GAO-14-460 Army Networks

satellite communications waveforms allowing Soldiers to participate in 

voice and data communications networks and transmit position location 

information.

Army commanders use Manpack radios to provide networked 

communications for host vehicles and dismounted Soldiers during all 

aspects of military operations; communicate and create networks to 

exchange voice, video, and data using legacy waveforms or the SRW; 

and share voice and data between two different communications 

networks.

As we discussed earlier, the histories of the Manpack and Rifleman 

radios were parallel until 2011.7 Low-rate production began in June 2011, 

for 100 Manpack radios. The full-rate production decision, initially 

expected in December 2012, is now expected to be in February 2015. 

However, in October 2012, the Army received approval for an additional 

3,726 low-rate production Manpack radios. The initial production delays 

caused a delay in initial operational capability from March 2013 to August 

2013.

Acquisition category: ACAT ID, as part of HMS program

Acquisition phase: Production

System development contract award: July 2004

Contractor: General Dynamics C4 Systems Inc.

Contract type: Cost-Plus-Award-Fee

Low rate production contract: June 2011

Contract type: Firm Fixed Price

Total program (fiscal year 2013-2019): $1,900.35 million

 7 The JTRS HMS programs started with a single developmental contract for both the 

Rifleman and Manpack radios, but were then separated into two acquisition schedules as 

the full rate productions decisions were aligned with the revised acquisition strategy.

Background

Program Status
Appendix II: Supplemental Information for Nine 

Army Networking Systems

Page 26 GAO-14-460 Army Networks

Quantity (fiscal years 2013-2019): 12,553

Next major program event: Draft Request for Proposal fourth quarter 

fiscal year 2014.

Following full and open competition, a single cost-plus-award-fee 

development contract was awarded in July 2004. The Army began low 

rate production in 2011, using a firm-fixed-price contract, and continues to 

receive low-rate units. However, the Army told us that, because of the 

Congressional direction for full and open competition, the full rate 

production decision has been delayed to allow for changes in the program 

acquisition strategy. The program is coordinating with DOD officials on a 

competition strategy prior to solicitation for procurement. The Army plans 

to award multiple fixed-price contracts to all qualified vendors using a twostep sealed bid process. Further, the Army plans to award initial delivery 

orders for qualification testing and operational assessment and award fullrate production orders based on operational assessments and best value.

The Joint Battle Command-Platform (JBC-P) provides joint forces 

command and control (C2) and situational awareness capability at the 

platform level and enables mission accomplishment across the entire 

spectrum of joint military operations. JBC-P serves as the cornerstone for 

Joint Blue Force Situational Awareness and provides continuous near 

real-time identification of friendly locations to populate the Joint Common 

Operating Picture. JBC-P software is designed to run on existing Force 

XXI, Battle Command, Brigade and Below (FCBC2) systems as well as 

new hardware items, thereby reducing the Army’s investment in new 

hardware. JBC-P is an upgrade from FCBC2 in that it provides enhanced 

chat room capability, improved mission command applications, a more 

intuitive graphical interface, enhanced blue force situational awareness, 

and ruggedization of hardware.

Force XXI, Battle Command, Brigade and Below began as a program in 

1996 with primary capabilities of Situational Awareness (e.g. friendly and 

enemy position data) and Command and Control messaging (orders, free 

text, overlays, etc.) for combat platforms and tactical vehicles. In its early 

years, FBCB2 relied upon line-of-sight radio communications, but later 

adopted satellite and became commonly referred to as Blue Force

Tracking, or BFT. In 2006, the Army began a software product line called 

Joint Capabilities Release (JCR) that, according to Army officials, 

Competition History and 

Plans

Joint Battle 

Command-Platform

Background
Appendix II: Supplemental Information for Nine 

Army Networking Systems

Page 27 GAO-14-460 Army Networks

provided increased chat and messaging capabilities. However, these 

capabilities were still limited. To address these limitations, the Army 

initiated a follow-on effort called JBC-P, which the Joint Requirements 

Oversight Council approved in May 2008. JBC-P heavily leverages both 

the hardware and product line software of JCR and FBCB2 to introduce 

its enhancements to operational units. In September 2009, an Acquisition 

Decision Memorandum approved the system’s entry into the Engineering 

and Manufacturing Development Phase. In July 2012, the Program 

Executive Office, Command and Tactical, as the JBC-P Milestone 

Decision Authority, approved the program for production. During the 

October through November 2013 Network Integration Evaluation 14.1, the 

Army conducted a JBC-P software build 5.1 customer test to demonstrate 

correction of Initial Operational Test and Evaluation deficiencies which 

supported a Full Rate Production decision in December 2013.

Acquisition category: ACAT II8

Acquisition phase: Production

Contract award: Various

Contractor: Various

Contract type: Various

Total program: $1,975.11 million

Research and development: $206.4 million

Procurement: $1,768.7 million

Quantity: 25,0869

 8 ACAT II programs are defined as those acquisition programs that do not meet the 

criteria for an ACAT I program, but do meet the criteria for a major system estimated by 

the DoD component head to require an eventual total expenditure for RDT&E of more 

than $185 million in FY 2014 constant dollars, or for procurement of more than $835 

million in FY 2014 constant dollars or those designated by the Milestone Decision 

Authority (MDA) to be ACAT II. The MDA is the DoD Component Acquisition Executive 

(CAE) or a designee.

Program Status
Appendix II: Supplemental Information for Nine 

Army Networking Systems

Page 28 GAO-14-460 Army Networks

Next major program event: JBC-P will participate in NIE 14.2 for Followon Test and Evaluation as well as NIE 15.1 as a System Under 

Evaluation (SUE).

According to the Army, the FBCB2 and BFT hardware systems are known 

as the mounted Family of Computer Systems; DRS Tactical has a 3-year 

contract with 2 option years to provide needed hardware. The JBC-P 

software is being developed in-house at the U.S. Army Aviation and 

Missile Research, Development and Engineering Center’s Software 

Engineering Directorate, rather than selecting a contractor. The program’s 

strategy is to use existing hardware so that JBC-P will largely be a 

software-intensive effort. The Army also stated they plan to recompete 

periodically for things like computers to get new technologies and reduce 

costs and contends that competition has already netted 25-30% satellite 

savings and other cost savings for the network operations center. The 

program has conducted market research to identify potential sources and 

is engaging industry, both large and small.

The Nett Warrior is an integrated dismounted leader situational 

awareness system for use during combat operations. According to the 

Army, the system provides unparalleled situational awareness to the 

dismounted leader and allows for faster and more accurate decisions in 

the tactical fight. The Nett Warrior program focuses on the development 

of the situational awareness system, which has the ability to graphically 

display the location of an individual leader’s location on a digital georeferenced map image on a smart device. Additional Soldier and leader 

locations also can appear on the smart device digital display. Nett Warrior 

connects through a secure radio to send and receive information from 

one Nett Warrior to another, thus connecting the dismounted leader to the 

network. These radios will also connect the equipped leader to higher 

echelon data and information products to assist in decision making and 

situational understanding. Soldier position location information will appear 

on network via interoperability with the Army’s JTRS capability. This 

allows the leader to easily see, understand and interact in the method that 

best suits the user and the particular mission, help leaders avoid 

fratricide, and make soldiers more effective and lethal in the execution of 

their combat missions.

 9 Quantity amount of 25,086 is only for new JBC-P system hardware procurement and 

does not include FBCB2 legacy systems on which JBC-P will be installed.

Competition History and 

Plans

Nett Warrior
Appendix II: Supplemental Information for Nine 

Army Networking Systems

Page 29 GAO-14-460 Army Networks

The Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and 

Logistics approved the Ground Soldier Ensemble (later renamed Nett 

Warrior) for entry into the Technology Development Phase in February 

2009. The initial low-rate production contract was awarded in 2012 with a 

follow-on low-rate buy authorized in July 2013. The Nett Warrior is 

intended to address operational requirements to provide the dismounted 

Leader with improved situational awareness, command and control 

capabilities. It links the dismounted Leader via voice and data 

communications to Soldiers at the tactical edge and to headquarters at 

Platoon and Company levels.

Acquisition category: ACAT II

Acquisition phase: Production

Technology development: February 2009

Low rate production contract award: April 2012

Contractor: Various

Contract type: Various

Total program: $ 793.5 million

Research and development: $338.1 million

Procurement: $455.4million

Quantity: 26,680

Next major program event: Full-rate production – Second Quarter 2015

Three Technology Development contracts were awarded in April 2009 to 

General Dynamics C4 Systems of Scottsdale, Arizona; Raytheon Network 

Centric Systems of McKinney, Texas; and Rockwell Collins of Cedar 

Rapids, Iowa. The systems developed under these contracts have 

undergone Developmental Tests and completed a limited user test in late 

2010.

In August 2011, the Army held a configuration steering board that 

approved the recommended de-scoping of the system’s requirements and 

Background

Program Status

Competition History and 

Plans
Appendix II: Supplemental Information for Nine 

Army Networking Systems

Page 30 GAO-14-460 Army Networks

set the new technical baseline. Based on the configuration steering board 

recommendations, the Army further refined the system to provide 

competitively procured End User Devices (commercial-based 

smartphone-like devices) connected to the Rifleman Radio. As a result of 

the steering board changes, the Army did not pursue the original planned 

limited competition among the technology development phase contractors 

for production effort and instead adopted a commercial approach, 

allowing the program to proceed directly to low rate production.

Additionally, according to Army Officials, the program plans to employ 

competition at the component level through contract actions with short 

durations, even one-time buys, to take advantage of technology 

advancements. For example, the end user devices will likely be 

purchased using competitively awarded indefinite delivery, indefinite 

quantity contract delivery orders. This type of contract allows the agency 

to bring in new contractors without having to go through the process of 

awarding a new competitive contract.

According to documents provided by the Army, the Nett Warrior program 

executed 24 competitive contract actions over fiscal years 2012 and 2013 

valued at $94.9 million. According to officials, the Army made the majority 

of these purchases through other agencies’ contract vehicles as purchase 

orders. The purchases included a variety of items, such as smart phones, 

cases, secure digital memory cards, and styluses. The Nett Warrior has 

also used market research to get feedback from industry utilizing the 

Federal Business Opportunities site to post notices intended to obtain 

industry comments on proposed solicitations for subcomponents. In 

January 2013, the Army posted a notice seeking industry feedback on a 

draft request for proposals that would seek to procure networking hubs 

and power supply.

Warfighter Information Network - Tactical (WIN-T) is essentially the 

soldiers’ Internet, providing a satellite-based tactical communications 

backbone, to which other Army networked systems need to connect in 

order to function. WIN-T employs a combination of terrestrial, airborne, 

and satellite-based transport options, to provide robust, redundant 

connectivity. It enables battle command on the move, keeping highly 

mobile and dispersed forces connected to one another and to the Army’s 

global information network. With essential voice, video and data services, 

commanders can make decisions faster than ever before and from 

anywhere on the battlefield information. WIN-T will be fielded in three 

increments, all of which are managed by the same program office. 

Increment 1 is fielded, Increment 2 is currently fielded, and Increment 3 is 

Warfighter 

Information NetworkTactical Increment 2
Appendix II: Supplemental Information for Nine 

Army Networking Systems

Page 31 GAO-14-460 Army Networks

currently being restructured. We discuss Increment 3 later in this 

appendix.

WIN-T Increment 2 provides commercial and military band satellite 

communications to Division, Brigade, Battalion and Company while also 

providing on the move capability and a mobile infrastructure. It further 

provides satellite communications and supports limited collaboration and 

mission planning. Using equipment mounted on combat platforms, WIN-T 

Increment 2 delivers a mobile capability that reduces reliance on fixed 

infrastructure and allows leaders to move on the battlefield while retaining 

situational awareness and mission command capabilities. It enables 

distribution of information via voice, data and real-time video from groundto ground and ground-to-satellite communications.

The Army designed the WIN-T as three-tiered communications 

architecture (space, terrestrial and airborne) to serve as the Army’s highspeed and high-capacity tactical communications network. WIN-T was 

restructured following a March 2007 Nunn-McCurdy unit cost breach of 

the critical threshold,10

• Increment 1: Networking At-The-Halt enables the exchange of voice, 

video, data and imagery throughout the battlefield using a satellite 

based network. Increment 1 has been fielded.

and will be fielded in the following three 

increments:

• Increment 2: Initial Networking On-The-Move provides command and 

control down to the company level and implements improved network 

security architecture. Increment 2 has been fielded.

• Increment 3: Develops the network operations software to enable 

seamless integration of tactical network functions and enhanced 

waveforms for increased throughput capability. WIN-T Increment 3 is 

currently being restructured.

 10 10 U.S.C. § 2433 establishes the requirement for the DOD to prepare unit cost reports 

on major defense acquisition programs or designated subprograms. If a program exceeds 

cost growth thresholds specified in the law, this is commonly referred to as a NunnMcCurdy breach, which DOD is required to report to Congress and, if applicable, submit a 

certification to Congress in order to continue the program, in accordance with 10 U.S.C. 

§ 2433a.

Background
Appendix II: Supplemental Information for Nine 

Army Networking Systems

Page 32 GAO-14-460 Army Networks

Acquisition category: ACAT ID

Acquisition phase: Procurement

Program start: June 2007

Low rate production contract award: March 2010

Contractor: General Dynamics C4 Systems, Inc.

Contract type: FFP IDIQ

Total cost: $5,046.2 million

Research and development: $296.6 million

Procurement: $4,749.6 million

Quantities: 2,156

Next program action: Full-rate production decision

The initial milestone B, which is the point at which a system enters 

system development, in 2003 included two competing contractors—

Lockheed Martin and General Dynamics C4 Systems. In August 2004 the 

competing contractors merged into one team with General Dynamics as 

the lead. After the Nunn McCurdy breach in 2007 and program 

restructure, a sole source contracting approach was used based on the 

authority of 10 U.S.C. 2304(c)(1) that the requirements were available 

from only one or a limited number of responsible sources and no other 

supplies or services would satisfy agency requirements and for follow-on 

production since supplies are only available from the original source for 

continued production. A second Follow-on Operational Test and 

Evaluation is scheduled for the October through November 2014 

timeframe at NIE 15.1 to support the full rate production decision review, 

which is expected to occur in 2015. The Government will consider 

requiring the contractor in the proposal to identify items which the 

government will be able to acquire competitively in the future, in 

substantial quantities.

Program Status

Competition History and 

Plans
Appendix II: Supplemental Information for Nine 

Army Networking Systems

Page 33 GAO-14-460 Army Networks

WIN-T Increment 3 builds on the capabilities of previous WIN-T 

Increments by developing the network operations software (NetOps) 11

that enables the seamless integration and management of tactical 

networks, and the enhanced waveforms that increase throughput and 

improve network capacity and robustness. Until recently, WIN-T 

Increment 3 had intended to introduce an additional line-of-sight link using 

an airborne platform. However, an Army Configuration Steering Board 

meeting held on November 7, 2013 approved the de-scoping of the 

program to focus on NetOps and completion of the waveform 

development efforts. As a result, WIN-T Increment 3 is currently being 

restructured and upon Defense Acquisition Executive approval, a revised 

program baseline will be created.

Increment 3: Full Networking On-The-Move provides full mobility 

command and control for all Army field commanders. Network reliability 

and robustness is enhanced with the addition of enhanced network 

operations software and enhanced waveforms.

Acquisition category: ACAT ID

Acquisition phase: Development

Program start: June 2007

Development contract award: July 2007

Contractor: General Dynamics C4 Systems, Inc.

Contract type: Cost Plus Award Fee

Total cost: $ 3,621.8 million

Research and development: $ 1,991.0 million

Procurement: $ 1,630.8 million

Quantities: 699

 11 The Networks Operations Software provides the monitoring, control, and planning tools 

to ensure management of the voice, data, and internet transport networks.

Warfighter 

Information NetworkTactical Increment 3

Background:

Program Status
Appendix II: Supplemental Information for Nine 

Army Networking Systems

Page 34 GAO-14-460 Army Networks

Next program action: TBD

The initial development contract was the result of a competitively awarded 

contract between two competing contractors—Lockheed Martin and 

General Dynamics C4 Systems. In August 2004 the competing 

contractors merged into one team with General Dynamics as the lead.

The follow-on development contract will be a sole source to the current 

contractor—General Dynamics C4 Systems. According to Army officials, 

sole source is planned because the contract cannot be competitively 

awarded without unacceptable delays in fulfilling the Army’s 

requirements. For the follow-on development contract, the contractor 

plans to conduct sub-tier competition to ensure it is getting the best 

commercial products at fair and reasonable prices. The program 

anticipates a sole source award for low rate production to ensure success 

of the manufacturing demonstrations and initial operational tests.

Competition history and 

plans
Appendix III: Comments from the Department 

of Defense

Page 35 GAO-14-460 Army Networks

Appendix III: Comments from the 

Department of Defense

GAO received DOD’s 

letter on May 21, 2014.
Appendix IV: GAO Contact and Staff 

Acknowledgments

Page 36 GAO-14-460 Army Networks

Belva M. Martin, (202) 512-4841 or martinb@gao.gov.

In addition to the contact named above, LaTonya Miller, Assistant 

Director; Marie P. Ahearn; William C. Allbritton; Marcus C. Ferguson; 

William Graveline; James Haynes; Sean C. Seales; Wendy P. Smythe; 

Robert S. Swierczek; and Paul G. Williams made key contributions to this 

report.

Appendix IV: GAO Contact and Staff 

Acknowledgments

GAO Contact

Staff 

Acknowledgments

(121115)
The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation, and 

investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its 

constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance and 

accountability of the federal government for the American people. GAO 

examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and 

policies; and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance 

to help Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. 

GAO’s commitment to good government is reflected in its core values of 

accountability, integrity, and reliability.

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no 

cost is through GAO’s website (http://www.gao.gov). Each weekday 

afternoon, GAO posts on its website newly released reports, testimony, 

and correspondence. To have GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted 

products, go to http://www.gao.gov and select “E-mail Updates.”

The price of each GAO publication reflects GAO’s actual cost of 

production and distribution and depends on the number of pages in the 

publication and whether the publication is printed in color or black and 

white. Pricing and ordering information is posted on GAO’s website, 

http://www.gao.gov/ordering.htm. 

Place orders by calling (202) 512-6000, toll free (866) 801-7077, or 

TDD (202) 512-2537.

Orders may be paid for using American Express, Discover Card, 

MasterCard, Visa, check, or money order. Call for additional information.

Connect with GAO on Facebook, Flickr, Twitter, and YouTube.

Subscribe to our RSS Feeds or E-mail Updates. Listen to our Podcasts.

Visit GAO on the web at www.gao.gov.

Contact:

Website: http://www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm

E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470

Katherine Siggerud, Managing Director, siggerudk@gao.gov, (202) 512-

4400, U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 

7125, Washington, DC 20548

Chuck Young, Managing Director, youngc1@gao.gov, (202) 512-4800

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 

Washington, DC 20548

GAO’s Mission

Obtaining Copies of 

GAO Reports and 

Testimony

Order by Phone

Connect with GAO

To Report Fraud, 

Waste, and Abuse in 

Federal Programs

Congressional 

Relations

Public Affairs

Please Print on Recycled Paper.